INTEL Recall of Sandy Bridge CPU's!???

I ordered a SandyBridge based laptop from System76 a few days ago, got this, this morning.


System76
------------------------------------------------------
order number: xxxxxx
Detailed Invoice: https://www.system76.com/account_history_info.php?order_id=xxxxxx
Date Ordered: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The comments for your order are

As you may have heard, Intel has issued a recall on Sandy Bridge chipset components. These components are built into the motherboard of the Gazelle Professional and Serval Professional laptops. System76 has halted shipments of Serval and Gazelle Pro laptops until new chipsets are manufactured by Intel.

Currently, Intel is scheduled to supply qualification samples of the new chipset to System76 in the middle of February. System76 RD and QC will make it their first priority to test and qualify this new chip revision and prepare for mass production.

The mass production version of the revised 6 series is scheduled to begin delivery from Intel to System76 in limited quantities at the end of February 2011. We estimate that we will resume limited quantity shipment of the Serval Pro and Gazelle Pro in the middle of March 2011. Stabilization of shipment for all models should occur by the end of April 2011.

If you wish to keep your order in place, your system will be among the first to ship and you will not have to restart at the end of the order list. Alternatively, if you have an urgent need for a laptop, the System76 Pangolin Performance and Lemur UltraThin models are in stock and unaffected by the recall.

Kind Regards,


The Staff @ System76



Your order has been updated to the following status.

New status: On Hod

Please reply to this email if you have any questions.

 

That sounds pretty much the same as Sager/Clevo's statement.

 

The older models having less performance is correct for the most part unless you consider the Sager laptop that can use the GTX 485M along with a Desktop CPU as well as having the option of SLI.

 

I really wonder how much performance you would get over the SB? Is it enough to make you want to carry around a 12 lb. laptop?
The cost is really up there too.

 

^^^Cost is the factor for me; I don't carry my laptop much, so as long as it isn't like lugging a 45 lb plate around, I couldn't care.

I am curious though, how does SB in a Clevo perform on video encoding? Can it take advantage of the SB Quick Sync feature, or are you just screwed?

That is primarily the reason I am interested in SB.

 

I found that I hardly carried my laptop, it was simply a case of moving it from one room to another, taking it with me in a backpack to another location or just having it packed in the car on a journey to a different area so the weight wouldn't be such an issue.

With the previous gen laptop that has the Desktop CPU, gaming performance has the potential to be even better than the SB simply because you can have 2x GTX 485M GPU's in it and the default CPU will certainly match the SB.

If I did buy that one, I would stay with the default CPU and only a single GTX 485M but you still have good potential for future upgrades where it really matters for me, which is in gaming performance!

The only reason why I wantd to upgrade was due to the GTX 485M, SB was of course a nice bonus with its improved battery and CPU performance but that pre gen laptop has the potential of lasting years to come.

 

The i7-2820QM encodes on the level of the i7-950.

 

If your going for any of the ones that don't have optimus enabled, IE 8170, 8150, and 8130, the IGP on the processor is disabled. Quicksync requires it to be enabled for it to function. Afaik there is no way to enable the IGP.

But there might be some shred of hope.

Lucid Enables Quick Sync with Discrete Graphics on Sandy Bridge - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

 

Not quite. The chip package has a bunch of stuff on the die. The SATA II controller is the exact same one used in the previous generation and it is in fact an UNUSED connection that after enough heat and time can start draining power off of the clock line for the SATA II controller. They expect this would effect 1 user in 20 after about three years. (Since it is heat related I'd say laptops would see it more or sooner.) No reason to think it is related to usage.

The existing chip sets were pretty much the same old thing with the addition of the SATA III controller which is a probably why they didn't focus enough stress testing on the SATA II portions.

 

There is a faulty transistor inside the sata II controller that degrades it, its nothing to do with the heat surrounding the controller.

Intel Sandy Bridge chipset flaw identified as a rogue transistor affecting SATA ports -- Engadget

 

My concern isn't gaming tho. I will be using it mainly to render video AVCHD and above. This is really CPU intensive stuff, not so much the GPU. I actually fly internationally and portability is kind of important for the times I do fly. If I'm just going away for 3 weeks or a month I can live without the laptop. But for longer there's no way. A true desktop isn't possible, can't bring that at all.
I'm thinking the wait for SB is the way to go. It's certainly fast enough and weighs a lot less. If I was using it like you are then it wouldn't matter about the portability as much.
I don't even need the 485M. I'm going with the 460M it should be good enough for me.
Thanks

 

Yeah, 460M is more than enough.

I'm probably going to jump on the 6970m though, looks nice and cheap.

 

If and when it's price and availability is announced.

 

Yeah, but doesn't hurt to keep my hopes up!

 

For your personal uses the Desktop replacement will definitely not fit your requirements, and I agree that waiting for Sandybridge is the way to go. The money you save by staying with the default GPU config of the GTX 460M could be used to upgrade the CPU a little. Your use would probably suit either an SSD or a hybrid drive, or a small SSD for the main drive and a huge standard HDD for the second drive if you opted for the 17'' chassis.

 

Yeah I thought about that but I'm upgrading the CPU to the 2720 which is where the sweet spot for SB chips.
If I got the 17" I'd end up with more than I really need. but I've heard that 3D is better with the 485M. Still that's a big expense.

 

***ALERT***

In case this wasn't posted elsewhere:

As of today, Intel announced they will immediately begin shipping P67 and H67 chipsets again as long as laptop manufacturers do not use the effected SATA ports.

QUOTE: "This should not only mean that Sandy Bridge laptops will be on the market sooner rather than later, but it should also help to speed up supply of updated chips to those who actually need them."

http://blog.laptopmag.com/intel-and-...-to-ship-again

 

However, this may still be limited number of laptops because many may not have utilized only ports 0 and 1 because of optical drive and eSATA ports. I guess smaller notebooks with no optical drive or eSATA port it would be fine.

 

This will only help laptops that:

1. Only have one hard drive and one optical drive
2. Do not have an eSATA port

The next problem is to update the BIOS so that the optical drive uses ports 0 or 1, which when taken with the no eSATA port will not really solve the issue for many laptops. It will not affect Sager or most of the ASUS laptops. It will not affect any ASUS laptops that have two hard drive bays and one optical drive bay (e.g. G series and ASUS N73JQ).

 

Some are missing the point here of what Intel is trying to do. For every flawed chip that is used elsewhere without issue or any need for replacement leaves one more new chip available that much quicker for systems that will need it - thus Intel is attempting to speed up their attempt at replenishing the industry inventory.

 

And I say GREAT!

Let the low end laptops take the flawed chipsets so the high end laptops don't have to fight so hard to get allocation.

It won't speed up the release of the "revised" chipsets though. It just may loosen up the limited supply once they do get rolling.

 

Everyone should understand that this will not have a direct effect on Clevo or similar units, but only an indirect effect due to resultant decreasing demand for the new chipsets moving forward.

I understood that to be the case in the article, but I should have stated it more clearly while referencing it. Sorry about that!

 

Wha.. what's going on, I don't understand.

Is Intel allowing companies such as Sager/Clevo to ship their models again?

 

No! Only those manufacturers that don't need or use the 4 flawed SATA ports will be allowed to resume shipping immediately. The result of this is that more new chipsets should be available more quickly, moving forward, for those laptops that actually require them, as do all Clevo units.

 

From what I understand lower end laptops will continue to use the flawed chipsets since they most likely only have one HDD, ODD, and no esata. These things can be attached to port 0 and 1 (the unaffected ones).

This will ease up on the demand when the fixed chipsets come out since not every laptop will need a new one. Therefore, our Sagers will get here 1 hour sooner than they would have already

 

OH!!!!!

Got it. Thanks for explaining!

 

It just seemed obvious from the day Intel announced the chipset flaw that they would not rest on their scheduling laurels, and they may very well have had to offer concessions to laptop manufacturers to continue using the flawed chipsets to assist them with a more speedy inventory recovery.

 

sorry for the dummy question, but what kind of laptops would use the "eSATA" port? I understand the SATA ports 0 and 1 being used for HDD and Optical, but where/when is the other "eSATA" ports used?

 

eSata is just another connection on the laptop. Usually they are combined with a usb port. It is used when you have a eSata device and you plug it in. If you don't use eSata, it won't be of any difference to you.

 

Uh ah, would somebody from this forum buy such a notebook if he knew that the motherboard has a flawed chip even if the shelled end product is fine?

Without a nice discount I think that only people that buy notebooks by their looks will be happy with them, meaning people that obviously don't know anything about the recall.

 

Even if someone didn't mind the flaw in a system that would never be affected by it, there is a little thing called DISCLOSURE that would prevent any legitimate company from selling a flawed chipset without customer notice.

Hence, as was mentioned, there will likely be discounts put in place to move the products out of current inventory. Many people won't care because they don't understand technology in the first place - they'll only see that they're saving money. And as I notioned earlier, Intel is likely the one reimbursing companies for those necessary discounts (concessions).

But it's a win-win for Intel because they not only get products moving again, but they also speed up their new chipset inventory schedule while not having to take the full loss on the flawed chipsets. The expected discounts will actually save them money, so when all is said and done they're not really conceding anything. Genius!

 

If you have a product that has a flaw that CANNOT EVER AFFECT YOU IN ANY WAY, why would you care?

 

Because the consumer is paying for a product that should not contain said flaw. Arguably, the flaw does affect the consumer in that they are not getting what they paid for.

 

so any amd processor that has had a core turned off and sold as a lower model should not be sold as such?

It's like saying my laptop has a scratch on the inside of the casing...You'll never see it and it will never affect you, I don't see why you'd have any problem with that...

 

If the manufacturer or seller knowingly markets the product as one that has all cores turned on, and the consumer is paying under that impression, then no, it should not be sold with a core turned off.

The consumer should be made aware, so that they can be the judge of whether it is a fair purchase for them.

Technically, the scratch constitutes a flaw/defect in the casing that inevitably weakens its structure. That it will never be seen by the consumer does not necessarily mean its effects will never be felt by the consumer. If a seller is aware of the scratch, then that knowledge should be disclosed to the consumer before the sale is made. If none of the parties involved are aware of the scratch, then that, of course, negates the possibility of any kind of disclosure.

 

I understand where you're going with this. But I don't think you would ever want to know what's really "wrong" with the next new car you buy. They would never sell a single car.

 

I do see your point there, but I guess that's why there are also design tolerances. I think I would still prefer knowing "what's wrong", while also knowing that ensuring zero defects is pretty much unsustainable (not to mention practically impossible) in most cases due to prohibitive cost. I guess most of our purchases could really be based on the perception of "least defects".

 

AMD *does* sell defective processors with cores/cache turned off where the defects are as lower model processors. This is why you can buy amd processors and unlock them to higher models - sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. They don't disclose anything and nobody cares.

 

Thanks. I have an external 2.5" hard drive, which I always use and plug into one of my laptop's USB ports. So the chipset flaw will affect me?

 

^--^
No one can say if it will affect you unless we know what you have, or intend to buy.

 

The flaw is with the SATA controller, so the eSATA port is affected. USB is not affected.

However it may affect other parts of your notebook (such as the optical drive) so we would need to know what you have/are intending to get.

 

One problem is if this thing may create problems if somebody will start selling parts of such a computer.

Also, Intel did not disclose the companies that will receive such chips, because this is a real PR problem even if technically things are ok.

This makes me think that the discounts may not be passed equally to the end users which would not be fair since those parts are lower end / defective ones.